[FRIAM] more agonism

[glen]

Ha! I care much less about any particular false dichotomy than I do about the causes of dichotomies. The causes of dichotomies lie in agonistics, us versus them, this vs that, inside vs outside. Whatever triage methods we *happen* to adopt (or have impinged upon us) are always subject to fining and coarsening. When policing your tribe, you have to choose a (set of) scope(s). Which tribes are you policing?

One element of the 5Ws approach to media literacy is "Who". Who is Zach? He writes books! And makes videos! Surely, as a trained architect, he's an authority on gametes, right? An expert on probability distributions? Of course! >8^D This post is helpful in determining who Zach is and whether you might want to propagate his bullshit:
https://www.reddit.com/r/GenderCynical/comments/h81ymm/trust_fund_cismale_20_year_old_undergrad_is_new/

He's abandoned his named TLDN. But it's still available here:
https://web.archive.org/web/20220915143439/https://zacharyaelliott.com/about-me.html
and here:
https://www.genderparadox.com/about-me.html

Yes, I'm guilty of ad hominem. But, as I've argued here before, the assessment that a fallacy is always a fallacy is, itself, a fallacy. I guess, as an admitted postmodernist, I should be proud of Zach for his ultracrepidarianism ... the same way I'm proud of my anti-vaxx friends who think they understand vaccines better than, say, their PCP. It's OK. They prolly stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night. Network theory seems helpful, here. When deciding which tribe to police, it's useful to track the cliques and components of the graph. We're known by our friends as much as our enemies.

On 10/19/23 09:48, Steve Smith wrote:
> 
> On 10/18/23 11:27 AM, glen wrote:
>> Here's PZ Myers policing his community:
>>
>> The Gamete Delusion
>> https://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyngula/2023/10/17/the-gamete-delusion/
>>
> 
> https://www.theparadoxinstitute.com/watch/is-sex-bimodal
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I don't really have a dog in this fight other than the general feeling that I support underdogs (and not just the ones who fly off in all directions at once).
> 
> 
> to paraphrase one of the more notable FriAM-Sages... "people should be called what they want to be called"...  harping on the emic/etic conflation some more, I find these discussions (e.g. Dawkins et al) rather off-point in this regard.   I understand (vaguely) why we all feel we must make sweeping generalizations about *other people's business*... some of it is an empathetic response, wanting to understand, but some of it is the response of someone who wants to control others.     These *are* conflated by circumstance in the sense that  in spite of the pithy aphorism "your opinion of me is none of my business", most of us actually *do* care what others think of us and it does effect how they interact with us.   It always feels unfortunate that those who want to tell others how to present/feel/be too often set the subject of debate.
> 
> 
> I *expect* someone with their own dog in the fight to have an insider/personal view of these things and am generally interested and curious about their perspective up to their privacy.   For those who mostly just want to stir up a dogfight, I'm not particularly interested in their view beyond preparing myself for when *they* might choose to try to stir up a dog(cat?)fight in *my* backyard.
> 


-- 
ꙮ Mɥǝu ǝlǝdɥɐuʇs ɟᴉƃɥʇ' ʇɥǝ ƃɹɐss snɟɟǝɹs˙ ꙮ